News Does that N-1 animated render looks convincing to you ?

[N_Molson]

I stumbled upon this, and I must say I never saw before the fairing being cut in three segments, or the stages having such big skirts... And they don't quote sources as far as I can see...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0bXTnTuz50#t=84

Any opinions ?

 

[Urwumpe]

Looks like the technical drawings of it. Some stagings look a bit weird though.

 

[blixel]

I stumbled upon this... Any opinions ?

Just to say how incredible everything looks! Very impressive animations. Also, I've never even heard of the N-1. I'm such a n00b.

 

[N_Molson]

Looks like the technical drawings of it. Some stagings look a bit weird though.

Yeah, I agree, and I especially think about what we can see at 2:33 . No lattice structure under the shroud ? Is that believable ? :hmm:

 

[ISProgram]

Essentially, this was good find. Hard to find good N-1 footage anywhere. It's a very nice animation for a very sad rocket (it would've been pretty badass, had it not been for that first stage).

To me, the tri-sector staging actually looks pretty Soviet. Don't forget the Soyuz splits the same way, evidenced by the awesome launch footage from Sentinel 1A.

 

[Buck Rogers]

Nice Ani., would love to see those 3D models in Orbiter!

 

[N_Molson]

Then that Orbiter movie isn't very realistic...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55VeMPrzDRc

 

[Columbia42]

Then that Orbiter movie isn't very realistic...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55VeMPrzDRc

No, it definitely isn't. The animation is a far better recreation.

 

[Thunder Chicken]

I did not realize that the crew transfer for lunar descent and return was to utilize EVAs instead of a docking tunnel, and that only one cosmonaut went down to the surface (out of a total crew of 2).

I had in my head that the N-1 had a thrust of 11 million lbs vs. about 8 million for the Saturn V, and wondered why the Soviets didn't send along a wet bar and a sauna to the moon because they could lift it. It looks like payload weight actually was a problem.

 

[Urwumpe]

I had in my head that the N-1 had a thrust of 11 million lbs vs. about 8 million for the Saturn V, and wondered why the Soviets didn't send along a wet bar and a sauna to the moon because they could lift it. It looks like payload weight actually was a problem.

Not just that. The N-1 also had a much higher structural mass than the Saturn V.

 

[N_Molson]

Not just that. The N-1 also had a much higher structural mass than the Saturn V.

And not just that : another thing you have to consider is the ISP. The N-1 had no LOX/LH2 stage ; Saturn V had 2. Makes a serious difference in terms of fuel consumption. Using only LOX/RP-1 and hypergolics for a beyond LEO mission is clearly not optimal. The Saturn was a step forward in engines technology. Which is a bit ironical, because russians were light-years ahead in 1957 with the R-7 engines. And later, the Energia program allowed them to get back (the RD-170 derivatives, including the RD-180 used for the Atlas V). But that was AFTER Valentin Glusko admitted that fancy and lethal oxydizers like Fluorine were not such a good idea.